This invention generally relates to a system and method for intercepting rockets, artillery, and mortar for battlefield defense. In particular, the present invention relates to a method and system for neutralizing rockets, artillery, and mortars using a capture sock or net.
Historically, the greatest killer on the battlefield has been rockets, artillery, and mortar, often collectively referred to as RAM. A RAM threat is an extremely difficult target to kill. Using conventional interceptor technology, the interceptor is required to utilize high precision guidance systems to guide the interceptor accurately enough to hit the threat. Moreover, many interceptors utilize warheads to kill the RAM threat and thus require large and sophisticated hardware.
Various guidance systems for interceptors are well-known in the industry. Generally, guidance systems are either “passive”, “active”, or a combination of “active” and “passive.” Passive systems generally collect data from the target for guidance control, and are often referred to as homing guidance. Active systems obtain guidance instructions from a ground based system, for example, a radar tracking station, and are often referred to as command guidance. Any conventional guidance system can be used for the interceptor system and method disclosed herein and the type of guidance system used for any particular application is not a limitation of invention.
Most interceptors also utilize some type of steering device that allows the trajectory and flight of the interceptor to be altered during flight. Steering devices, and the guidance systems that control the steering devices, are well known in the industry. Any conventional steering device can be used for the interceptor system and method disclosed herein and the type of steering mechanism used for any particular application is not a limitation of the invention.
Some existing interceptors incorporate devices and systems to increase the interceptor's ability to hit the RAM threat. For example, the interceptor may incorporate an explosive warhead that detonates when the interceptor is in close proximity to the RAM, destroying the RAM in the blast. Alternatively, the interceptor may deploy a “fan” or “blades”, for example steel blades, to increase the coverage area of the interceptor when it encounters the RAM.
Even when an interceptor hits a RAM, it is extremely difficult to disable or destroy the RAM. For example, the thick case of the mortar and artillery rounds require large amounts of energy transfer from the interceptor in order to effect a “kill” that renders the unit harmless. Unfortunately, in some circumstances when a RAM is “killed”, shrapnel or debris from the RAM or the interceptor may still cause collateral damage.
Thus the success of the battle is often decided by economics—the cost and size of the interceptor and supporting fire control components are very high making the cost per RAM kill unacceptable. Indeed, as the acceptable miss distance of a particular intercept system (i.e., how close the interceptor must come to the RAM to enable it to destroy or disable the RAM) decreases, the cost of the intercept system goes up exponentially due to the complexity and sophistication of the guidance componentry. The enemy's ability to proliferate the low-cost, low complexity RAM threat easily counters a defense capability that is complex and expensive.
It is, therefore, desirable to provide a RAM neutralization system and method that increases the acceptable miss distance of an intercept system and requires less expensive guidance systems. It is further desirable to provide a RAM neutralization system and method that does not need to actually hit the RAM in order to neutralize it. It is further desirable to provide an RAM neutralization system and method that does not require the RAM to be detonated in order to be neutralized.